Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South Central, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

Ar an gcéad dul síos, beimid ag tacú leis an mBille seo. Is ábhar fíorthábhachtach é seo. Shamhlóinn go dtagann sé thar dheasca gach aon Teachta agus Seanadóir. Bíonn tionchar aige ar eagraíochtaí pobail, gnólachtaí agus a leithéidí. I am sure in any engagement Deputies have with businesses and community groups the issue of insurance comes up. It is absolutely crippling many businesses. Small and medium-sized businesses which make up the majority of Irish businesses and employ the majority of workers in the private sector, are seriously struggling. It is the case, as Deputy Quinlivan said, that many community organisations, family centres and sports clubs are finding it really very difficult to keep their costs down and focus their hard-earned fundraised money on the activities for which they were established.

Deputy Cowen made reference to play centres. It is a specific sector that is finding it very difficult. I am sure other Deputies have been contacted by them. One example is Chuckies, a well known outlet in Cork. It has approximately 37,000 customers, 2,500 of whom are classified as regular. The business has been going for approximately 16 years. It is well established in the community and has a big involvement in local community, voluntary and social causes. For example, it runs autistic days in association with the Rainbow Club. Like many play centres, it is at the pin of its collar in trying to meet the cost of insurance. It is finding it almost impossible, if not impossible, to find an insurer based here and the premiums are absolutely enormous.

We will support the legislation, but fraud is not the only issue. There is no question that insurance fraud is not a victimless crime as it affects all of us, but there are also many other issues that need to be addressed. In the Bill Deputy Michael McGrath cites section 26 of the 2004 Act as the section he wishes to improve. This will require careful consideration. The Minister has addressed the fact that section 29 deals with the issue to some extent. Subsection (1) states a person guilty of an offence under this Part shall be liable on conviction on indictment to a fine not exceeding €100,000 or imprisonment for a term not extending ten years or both. My understanding of subsection (1) in its totality is that it increases the maximum fine that can be imposed from €3,000 to €5,000 and places the legal costs on the plaintiff, a matter which is already at the discretion of the judge hearing the case. This is a suggestion worth considering and we need to discuss it further, but it is complex and making it judges "shall" is not as straightforward as it is sometimes made out. Obviously, it is common for costs to be awarded to whomever the judge sees fit, but the discretion of the judge is obviously important also. We need to consider this issue carefully, particularly in the context of the long established legal maxim of awarding costs following the event, which has a more concrete statutory basis in the Legal Services Regulation Act. We need to tread carefully, but it is certainly a proposal that is worth exploring further.

Section 2 of the Bill is a restatement of and makes reference to section 1. It places an additional reference to very specific cases in the 1951 Act.

To return to the issue of the cost of insurance more generally, it is crippling. Action on this issue has been slow and disappointing and caused frustration. It is almost three years since the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform, and Taoiseach produced its very progressive and strong report on the cost of insurance. The cost of motor insurance is a significant issue for many constituents who find it practically impossible to find an insurer to put them on the road and those who do receive quotes, they are out of control, particularly younger and older drivers. A particular category who receive quotes that are practically incomprehensible comprises returning immigrants. The joint committee found that the motor insurance industry had been deliberately hiding key information from public view and engaged in cartel-like behaviour. As far as I am concerned, that is the insurance companies throwing people to the wolves. The report stated all witnesses who had appeared before the committee, except those for the insurance industry, had highlighted as a serious problem the absence of data sharing and a complete absence of transparency throughout the sector. The absence of this information meant it was impossible to get to the root causes of motor insurance price increases. The committee stated this increased it concerns about how the insurance industry was operating and calculating risk. I am sure many people, whether for business, personal or motor insurance, will testify that a premium can be a little like a lottery and that they never quite know what they will receive.

The report also suggested another cause of the spikes in the cost of insurance which had seen some people's premiums increase by 100% was that insurance companies had been using their motor insurance books to bolster shortfalls in investment income in other areas. The CCPC and the Central Bank were also criticised. The committee found that the CCPC had insisted its remit was economy wide and limited to enforcement of competition law, something that does nothing to ensure the industry acts in the interests of those who avail of insurance and pay large chunks of money annually to insurance companies.

On the issue of insurance fraud, we have wasted a lot of time discussing the Garda insurance fraud unit. Towards the end of last year I received documents under freedom of information legislation that displayed a series of missed deadlines by Insurance Ireland since early 2017 to progress the proposal to set up an insurance fraud unit in An Garda Síochána funded by private industry. I heard the Minister state it was inappropriate for the industry to fund a section of An Garda Síochána. I agree, but that should have been the conclusion from the outset. We wasted an awful lot of time waiting for engagement and proposals from the insurance industry, as the freedom of information request shows. It was leading the Government on a merry dance on the issue. It had absolutely no interest in getting behind the proposal. From the very outset, it should have been for a fully publicly funded section of An Garda Síochána to deal with this area, but we wasted time and are no closer to it now because we were waiting for proposals. It really is frustrating, at a cost of approximately €1 million. It is entirely possible to fund and within the gift of the Government, if there was the political will, to do so. It should do it now, but it really is a shame that Insurance Ireland has delayed its establishment.

To be honest, despite its protestations that fraud is a cause of increased premiums, I am not sure tackling fraud is as much of a priority for the industry as it should be. Although it was belated, it was interesting to see the Tánaiste point last Thursday to the massive profits which Deputy Quinlivan outlined. Aviva made a profit of €113 million, which was up by €14 million. RSA made a profit of €35 million in the past 12 months, while FBD reported a profit of €50 million. These are very profitable organisations. I to not believe fraud goes half the way towards explaining the increased premiums. I am glad that the Tánaiste is belatedly realising this and I hope the Government is belatedly realising it because the time has come to take a very strong line with the insurance bodies. There is much more of a tale to tell about the practices in which they are involved. There is a need for much greater transparency on the premiums they charge because it is consumers, community organisations, individuals and businesses that are suffering. We need to see a lot more from the Government. I want to see it take a stronger line with the insurance industry, publicly fund a Garda insurance fraud unit and support and work with detailed legislative proposals such as this.

See this speech in context